memory_alphafandomcom-20200223-history
Talk:World Trade Center
I think that the most minimal analysis of this event is necessary for the article, i don't see much usefulness in going further and explaining causes for the attack, the participants, or the wars that followed, none of those events were really mentioned onscreen. all we know from the picture is that the buildings were devastated. -- Captain M.K.B. 04:38, 11 September 2006 (UTC) in hindsight... ...while i researched this topic for the small amount of information i added about the trek connection to 9/11, i'm not so sure it belongs here...but seems appropriate somewhere in memory alpha. i dunno. Deevolution 05:25, 21 March 2007 (UTC) removed text I have removed the following: :In the Star Trek universe, the 9/11 terrorist attacks would have taken place five years after the end of the Eugenics Wars, in which Khan Noonien Singh controlled many areas of the Middle East. It is a possibility that Khan was in some way associated with the 9/11 attacks, either planning them years before or supporting Middle East terrorist groups who engaged in the attacks years later. To speculate on the involvement of Khan, directly or indirectly, in a terrorist attack that took place 5 years after he left is just too speculative to me. Even if it had taken place when Khan was around, we have nothing at all linking the two events. We simply have to put limits on what we are going to allow for speculation, and this seems too far to me. We might as well also speculate that Braxton was somehow involved. --OuroborosCobra talk 06:22, 25 April 2007 (UTC) :I disagree. Khan was obviously the true perpetrator of the 9/11 attacks. Before he left, Khan left a note telling his followers to "Look after the dog, water the plants, and drive some airplanes into a few buildings while I'm gone." It's all common knowledge. You need to do more research, Cobra. --From Andoria with Sarcasm Yes, thanks for the catch. It probably is too speculative. The way its written now it just mentions Khan's departure five years before. I'm actually surprised the Enterprise producers put the twin towers footage in there becuase bringing Al-Queda into the Star Trek universe opens up a whole can of worms with regards to continuity and backstory issues. -FleetCaptain 06:45, 25 April 2007 (UTC) Some of it has been re-added: :In the Star Trek universe, the 9/11 terrorist attacks would have taken place five years after the end of the Eugenics Wars, during which Khan Noonien Singh controlled many areas of the Middle East. I am removing this. Here, I have to make a shout of "is it relevant?" After all, we could also have a note saying "the attack took place in New York, which was occupied by the Nazis 57 years earlier in an alternate timeline", or any number of things. The fact is, there isn't a relationship here. We don't even have stated in canon that al-Qaeda was involved in the attacks in the Trek universe. --OuroborosCobra talk 06:43, 25 April 2007 (UTC) :With Khan having once controlled "more than a quarter of your world from Asia through the Middle East" I think a piece of background about him is not harmful to this article. Maybe adding in, as mentioned about, al-Qaeda not being mentioned but probably involved and Khan's involvement dubious. -FleetCaptain 06:48, 25 April 2007 (UTC) It IS hurtful. It is adding three levels of connections that do not exist in canon. First, it is saying that these attacks had to do with al-Qaeda. Then it is saying that Khan might have had anything to do with al-Qaeda. Then it is saying that Khan might have had to do with orchestrating an al-Qaeda attack years after he left Earth. 3 levels of speculation not present in canon. --OuroborosCobra talk 06:52, 25 April 2007 (UTC) ::: Page is protected from this little edit war until we can come to a conclusion here. First off, Khan was not linked to the WTC in canon, no reason to link him here, as as well, referencing how long something happened after something else on a page is pointless unless it is directly relevant, ie citable vs. coincidental. --Alan del Beccio 06:54, 25 April 2007 (UTC) :The citation is relevant because it places the event in it's proper Trek-historical context. My reinsertion contained NO speculation whatsoever, it simply mentioned the fact that it occurred 5 years after the end of the EW, and that during the EW Khan ruled a substantial part of the ME.Capt Christopher Donovan 19:33, 27 April 2007 (UTC) There has been zero link established in canon between 9/11 and the Middle East. Please show me one if you have it. --OuroborosCobra talk 19:34, 27 April 2007 (UTC) :See my suggested note below which I think is a very good compromise. It mentions that yes there is no canon link to AQ but in the real world they were responsible. Thus, if they were also responsbile in the ST world, they would have come out of a Middle East ruled by Khan only five years before hand. -FleetCaptain 23:53, 27 April 2007 (UTC) And see my above response on three levels of speculation. This is simply unneeded for this article, and in fact harms it. --OuroborosCobra talk 23:57, 27 April 2007 (UTC) :Cutting out the Khan stuff would still leave the good point that AQ is not confirmed as the preps of 9/11 in Star Trek even though they did it in the real world. Saying that wouldn't be speculation. -FleetCaptain 00:05, 28 April 2007 (UTC) ::'OC', ALL that my reinsert said was that 9/11 occurred 5 years after the end of the EW (fact) and that during the EW, Khan controled a good part of the ME (also fact). Once again, there is ''no speculation whatsoever....none! The only "connection" or "correlation" is that of temporal sequencing. ::I understand why you would be concerned about the issue. Referencing real world tragedies in a fictional context is always a delicate exercise. That said, you are simply reading too much into what was inserted.Capt Christopher Donovan 09:48, 28 April 2007 (UTC) Too what end then? What purpose does a note like that solve other than to speculate? I might as well ass a note saying that "the attack took place in New York, which in an alternate timeline had been occupied by the Nazis 57 year earlier". There is not purpose or reason behind a note like that, as there is no canon link between them. --OuroborosCobra talk 14:50, 28 April 2007 (UTC) :To Donovan and Fleet Captain, ask yourselves this: how is the fact that the 9/11 attacks took place 5 years after Khan Singh's reign relevant to the World Trade Center? In particular, is it relevant given the fact that nothing on-screen or, as far as I know, off-screen (i.e. novels, reference works, etc.), connects Khan Singh with the 9/11 attacks? The answer, I'm afraid, is no, it is not relevant. Adding the note in the article would presume relevance when there is none, and that's where the whole speculation bit comes in. If that makes sense... --From Andoria with Love 15:36, 28 April 2007 (UTC) ::We can still cut the Khan stuff out and have a mention that the perps of the 9/11 attack, Al-queda, are not established in Star Trek thus leaving open the question of who committed the attacks in the Star Trek universe. I personally think it is way too big of a connection that Khan controlled the Middle East at one point, where AQ was based, but this isnt talked about on screen so that issue can be cut loose. BTW, why is the article still protected? Noone that I saw was edit warring. -FleetCaptain 04:45, 29 April 2007 (UTC) A brief note stating who the actual perpetrators were without going into speculation about Khan or what-not might be okay. To answer your next question, the article is still protected to prevent further edits until after this issue is resolved. And, for the record, there was actually an edit war between five people: after you added the note, Cobra removed it. The note was then reinserted (albeit, edited) by Captain Donovan, after which I removed it again. Then you re-added it, and finally Alan was forced to protect the page after removing the note for the final time. That's what's called an edit war. ;) --From Andoria with Love 05:57, 29 April 2007 (UTC) ::I'll agree that we can jettison direct mention of Khan (though I still feel it unnecessary), but I insist that it should at least be mentioned that 9/11 occurred 5 years after the end of the EW, as that is a matter of historical dating within the Trek Universe that implies NOTHING about who or what might have been responsible.Capt Christopher Donovan 01:06, 30 April 2007 (UTC) :::The one problem there is... We date the Eugenics Wars as having taken place in the mid-1990s, nothing more specific. Another question I have... who says that these events even took place on "9/11"? Or even in 2001? For all we know, in the Trek universe, they could have occurred in the midst of the EWs... -- Sulfur 01:10, 30 April 2007 (UTC) Page locking The page is locked now, why did someone do that? I thought we were all working together and having a polite discussion to improve the text. I don't think anyone was edit warring. Anyway, here is my proposed re-write. :The perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks (al-Qaeda) are not mentioned in dialouge, leaving open to the question as to whether it was al-Qaeda or some other group who committed the attacks insofar as the Star Trek universe is concerned. In addition, the 9/11 terrorist attacks would have taken place five years after the end of the Eugenics Wars, during which Khan Noonien Singh controlled many areas of the Middle East where al-Qaeda would have been based. Khan's involvement in 9/11 (if any) remains speculative. I think that is a very good background note for the purposes of this article as it links to other areas of Star Trek. I am also sure I am not the only fan who has wondered "if 9/11 happened, how does that tie in to the Eugenics War and Khan?" It is actually quite a fascinating thing to think about it. -FleetCaptain 06:58, 25 April 2007 (UTC)